The most common objection people have to our research: "Too many people would have been involved to pull off such a massive hoax." Well, with trillions of taxpayers' dollars at hand, this operation could certainly afford contracting many individuals (under a gag order and on a need-to-know basis). Meet the real - and unreal - persons, companies & entities assigned to carry out this gigantic, media & military-assisted psyop.

nonhocapito wrote:Like upstream noted, it is pretty simple: Wallace's alleged father is a vicsim. In other words, it never existed, never died on 9/11 and all that. So how could Dan Wallace be in any way a real character?

As to the reasons for the tragic death/murder, it was probably useful to give credibility and glory to Rudkowski. That's enough motive, in my opinion, considering that fake stories are a dime a dozen in that circle. There can be any sort of reason why Wallace was made disappear. Maybe it was a planned disappearance from the start, to connect the old vicsim generation to the new truther generation. Maybe he wasn't good enough an actor so they changed storyline. Maybe that actor moved to other things. But even if the disappearance constitutes a sign of internal fighting and murder, it is not more significant that a murder due to mafia infighting. But personally I find this "truth" the less likely to be. If the actor playing Wallace had been really murdered, we simply would never have heard of that angle of the story, and we would never have heard of "Dan Wallace" in the first place.

I agree that it seems that Dan must have been some kind of actor since his dad was a vicsim, but I don't think his potential murder would or has in any way given credibility or glory to Luke. If anything, I think you may be right that the perps didn't like the storyline or he was to move onto other things. Could be that they were worried people would look into who his dad really was.

I first heard about this guy long before I saw anything about vicsims, back in 2007. And basically, it was the video with the Web Fairy lady that got me curious.

nonhocapito wrote:I don't know what you mean with "truth fairy", but whoever was wearing that "investigate Dan Wallace murder" t-shirt I think was simply in cahoots with the "we are change" gang, and the confrontation was just part of the confusing game. The final purpose of the game is, clearly, to support the reality of Wallace and, consequently, to support the reality of his vicsim fireman father. While the murder accusations, hear hear, are never proved or even really investigated.

Because in this coward, fake world, things never really "happen".

Oops, I meant "WebFairy"(not Truth Fairy), Rosalee Grable , who apparently is nuts, but the video I referred to has disappeared, and was only online for a very short amount of time, which leads me to conclude that orchestrated or not, they don't want us to see it anymore. Which makes me think their might have been some truth to it. At one part in the video, she even says "he was supporting investigating no planes". That would seem like an odd statement for an orchestrated video. My experience with the truthlings around 2007 was that no planes was to be shouted down. That combined with the strange behavior from Luke and Matt and the quick removal of the video from the internet, is what made me suspicious. It was what made me finally write off Luke as cointel.

nonhocapito wrote:It is true that such a high percentage of israeli and jewish ties inside this alleged movement, if true, could only mean basic control of the whole 9/11 scam by the zionists. It cannot be accidental and in fact, often times, a zionist leadership appears to be the most likely possibility.

Of course, there is still the chance that other entities, say the CIA, might be using jewish-zionist movements as a coverup.Although this seems to be contradicted by the geo-strategical history of the last decade, considering how all the great changes subsequent to 9/11 worked in the direction of a stronger Israel, much more than they worked in the direction of a stronger USA, to the point that becomes at times even hard to imagine an alliance between the "west" and israel, and one must admit that the role of Bush and his crowelians peons must have been in support to the instances of Israel, rather than in support of a geopolitical vision of their own (what vision would that be?)

But who knows? A lot is yet to be discovered. Maybe all the parts involved think they are "using" the other parts to their ends. Personally I feel still far from grasping the whole scenario.

Isreal...Freemasons... CIA, what's the difference? They're all the same people. My research went down a different path when I found out that the guy I refer to a lot who is not just any mason, but a Sinclair, also had a mezuzah on his door. Why would a Scottish Rite Freemason who says he's a christian have one of those on his door? (he was the first owner of the house too). As it turns out, the British crown claims to be the direct descendants of the lost tribe of Judea, that's why the Queen of England has the Stone of Scone, or Jacob's Pillow, right under her throne. The so called "Chosen Ones" are blond haired and blue eyed, not bushy haired and hook nosed, though apparently there is a lot of coordination between the two. Their goal is to re establish a one world order HQ'd in Babylon.

*Update: I decided to try to search around for the video I'm referring to and found this re-upload from Ozzybinoswald..but its all grainy and with no sound and has about 2 minutes of BS before getting to the actual video:

At one part in the video, she even says "he was supporting investigating no planes". That would seem like an odd statement for an orchestrated video.

If I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, she is referring to the "murdered" Dan Wallace as looking into the NPT? That would tell me that their message is "Don't look into NPT, as you may end up dead."

At one part in the video, she even says "he was supporting investigating no planes". That would seem like an odd statement for an orchestrated video.

If I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, she is referring to the "murdered" Dan Wallace as looking into the NPT? That would tell me that their message is "Don't look into NPT, as you may end up dead."

I suppose, but doesn't that also lend credence to no planes? Seems like going through a lot of trouble to issue an unnecessary threat that simultaneously lends credit to no planes.

CryptoAnarchist wrote:My experience with the truthlings around 2007 was that no planes was to be shouted down. That combined with the strange behavior from Luke and Matt and the quick removal of the video from the internet, is what made me suspicious. It was what made me finally write off Luke as cointel.

We have to describe a scenario that is somewhat consistent. We cannot hint to the fact that Wallace spoke out about "no planes" and at the same time admit that Wallace was most certainly an actor. The two things don't go together. And it is not his "murder" that was meant to give credibility to Rudkowski, rather the official story of him tragically dying young while being committed heart and soul to Luke's cause.(it must be noted that we might be discussing in vain this angle, considering that there is no certainty a "Dan Wallace" even ever existed).I think that HonestlyNow is correct in deducing that the purpose of that enactment, just like with most of the "crazy" skits put up by early no planers such as Nico Haupt and the like, was to scare people away from the idea of no planes, that was hinted at as a dangerous, borderline territory.

CryptoAnarchist wrote:Isreal...Freemasons... CIA, what's the difference? They're all the same people. My research went down a different path when I found out that the guy I refer to a lot who is not just any mason, but a Sinclair, also had a mezuzah on his door. Why would a Scottish Rite Freemason who says he's a christian have one of those on his door? (he was the first owner of the house too). As it turns out, the British crown claims to be the direct descendants of the lost tribe of Judea, that's why the Queen of England has the Stone of Scone, or Jacob's Pillow, right under her throne. The so called "Chosen Ones" are blond haired and blue eyed, not bushy haired and hook nosed, though apparently there is a lot of coordination between the two. Their goal is to re establish a one world order HQ'd in Babylon.

I know that freemasonry, jewish supremacy and other "circles" are certainly connected. But how could we say that "there is no difference"? This would need a real insider knowledge as to who really call the shots. But as I said it is also important to observe the actual changes in the external world, to understand in what direction the world is going. I am not necessarily seeing any "new world order" shaping up as much as I am seeing an increased, and tightened, submission of western countries to the policies and needs of Israel. "Terrorism in the middle east" is another way to say "Israel is crucial". This can also be observed now in north Africa, as we are told that the new "regimes" apparently are "threatening Israel": once again, Israel is "at the center of the picture" and we all have to step up to defend it.

nonhocapito wrote:I know that freemasonry, jewish supremacy and other "circles" are certainly connected. But how could we say that "there is no difference"? This would need a real insider knowledge as to who really call the shots. But as I said it is also important to observe the actual changes in the external world, to understand in what direction the world is going. I am not necessarily seeing any "new world order" shaping up as much as I am seeing an increased, and tightened, submission of western countries to the policies and needs of Israel. "Terrorism in the middle east" is another way to say "Israel is crucial". This can also be observed now in north Africa, as we are told that the new "regimes" apparently are "threatening Israel": once again, Israel is "at the center of the picture" and we all have to step up to defend it.

If you study Freemasonry long enough, you begin to realize that it is entirely jewish. Their symbols and rituals are straight from Kaballah. One of the first things new masons are taught are hebrew letters and their meanings. I've studied both for awhile now and there is just so much overlap that their doesn't seem to be much difference.

nonhocapito wrote:I know that freemasonry, jewish supremacy and other "circles" are certainly connected. But how could we say that "there is no difference"? This would need a real insider knowledge as to who really call the shots. But as I said it is also important to observe the actual changes in the external world, to understand in what direction the world is going. I am not necessarily seeing any "new world order" shaping up as much as I am seeing an increased, and tightened, submission of western countries to the policies and needs of Israel. "Terrorism in the middle east" is another way to say "Israel is crucial". This can also be observed now in north Africa, as we are told that the new "regimes" apparently are "threatening Israel": once again, Israel is "at the center of the picture" and we all have to step up to defend it.

If you study Freemasonry long enough, you begin to realize that it is entirely jewish. Their symbols and rituals are straight from Kaballah. One of the first things new masons are taught are hebrew letters and their meanings. I've studied both for awhile now and there is just so much overlap that their doesn't seem to be much difference.

Yeah, I think we are cautioning each other about the same thing. I tend to agree that freemasonry is probably chiefly used by zionists to control non-jewish elites. It has probably always been that way, only these are the times when these things are becoming "visible" (up to the point that "Madonna" joins "Kabbalah"). It is not the time of Napoleon and Stalin hiding their hands under their coats anymore which, all things considered, is probably a progress. But we always have to leave room for the possibility that we are being fooled into believing a certain "still" picture, while things might be more complex and layered and fluid than that.

Thought it was dropping this guy into the thread (if he is not already here) - copied from the "Anthrax attack" thread:

I was scratching my head yesterday, trying to think of the guy who appeared on TV within an hour or so of the first tower explosion as a counter terrorist "expert". His name was Jerome Hauer (like Bremer, another Jew - I have nothing against any race, but the Jewish mafia are slap bang in the middle of 9/11). He blamed Bin laden and was also responsible for distributing the cipro to the White House staff.

He has an interesting CV - ex Giuliani advisor, Ex-Kroll Associates, responsible for the "Crisis Centre" of the OEM behind located next door the towers (Building 7).

Giuliani became a multi millionaire after 9/11 and I bet the same goes for this guy.

OK, I am new here and have not signed up to many sites before this. If my question is in the wrong place, please let me know OR shift it.

I joined this site to read, look, learn more about 9/11. I am not a longtime "truther" although I am a longtime doubter in the sense that 9/11, although horrific to me to look at, always bothered me with the Pentagon, especially the Pentagon. It was just not feasable that the Pentagon should a) be hit and b) that there was never any physical evidence of an airplane. I suppose that it is a bit like trust in a marriage, the doubt starts niggling away even though you can't bring yourself to believe it.

My question here is (and yes, I have spent time reading and maybe I have missed salient parts), what about these actors (fake victims/fake relatives)? Surely these people, and even the fake identities looked like real people, have family, friends, ex-colleagues, boyfriends, girlfriends, bosses, schoolmates, local butchers, yoga-instructers, etc... How come nobody has said: "Nancy X" is NOT DEAD!! She was in my dental clinic yesterday! How come no pissed off ex-spouse has come forward to say: "It's all a LIE! Daniel is an ACTOR FGS, doesn't anyone recognize him from commercials, etc.?" This kind of bothers me. Even actors have social circles and an extravaganza such as 9/11 would surely have kept everyone riveted to their TV screens. I would honestly have imagined that a number of people would have popped up saying: "NOT TRUE!!" Some of these people must have neighbors somewhere who would have stepped forward to denounce what they would have considered as a personal betrayal.

nonhocapito wrote:Yeah, I think we are cautioning each other about the same thing. I tend to agree that freemasonry is probably chiefly used by zionists to control non-jewish elites.

Freemasonry isn't used by "Zionists" but rather jews. Zionism is just another abstraction like all the other "-isms" thrown out there to distract people from looking in the direction of the actual beings committing the crimes & scams. You can't arrest, try, convict and incarcerate political & economic philosophies.

My question here is (and yes, I have spent time reading and maybe I have missed salient parts), what about these actors (fake victims/fake relatives)? Surely these people, and even the fake identities looked like real people, have family, friends, ex-colleagues, boyfriends, girlfriends, bosses, schoolmates, local butchers, yoga-instructers, etc... How come nobody has said: "Nancy X" is NOT DEAD!! She was in my dental clinic yesterday! How come no pissed off ex-spouse has come forward to say: "It's all a LIE! Daniel is an ACTOR FGS, doesn't anyone recognize him from commercials, etc.?" This kind of bothers me. Even actors have social circles and an extravaganza such as 9/11 would surely have kept everyone riveted to their TV screens. I would honestly have imagined that a number of people would have popped up saying: "NOT TRUE!!" Some of these people must have neighbors somewhere who would have stepped forward to denounce what they would have considered as a personal betrayal.

They have fake family, fake friends, fake ex-colleagues, fake boyfriends, fake girlfriends, fake bosses, fake schoolmates, fake local butchers andfake yoga-instructers, etc. Thanks to pioneering simulations of entire communities like MySpace, Facebook, et al, it's relatively easy to craft a bunch of names, punch in some scant details, link them together, and slowly inflate your sim with nonsense and bullshit until you have a novelistic backstory for every sim.

Perhaps in the future, it will become easier for sims to have appearances in the Social Security Death Index, but that seems to have been one of their big hurdles since very few were entered even into such a digital and abstracted database such as that.

The fact that not all databases are created equal should tell you something about how it's still pretty damn easy to simulate someone with nobody giving a shit whether that "person" is remotely ever proven real or not.

DeeJay wrote:My question here is (and yes, I have spent time reading and maybe I have missed salient parts), what about these actors (fake victims/fake relatives)? Surely these people, and even the fake identities looked like real people, have family, friends, ex-colleagues, boyfriends, girlfriends, bosses, schoolmates, local butchers, yoga-instructers, etc... How come nobody has said: "Nancy X" is NOT DEAD!! She was in my dental clinic yesterday! How come no pissed off ex-spouse has come forward to say: "It's all a LIE! Daniel is an ACTOR FGS, doesn't anyone recognize him from commercials, etc.?" This kind of bothers me. Even actors have social circles and an extravaganza such as 9/11 would surely have kept everyone riveted to their TV screens. I would honestly have imagined that a number of people would have popped up saying: "NOT TRUE!!" Some of these people must have neighbors somewhere who would have stepped forward to denounce what they would have considered as a personal betrayal.

Why would any friends, relatives, etc., of "Daniel" come forward to say he is not dead? Who would they report this to, the trustworthy media who perpetrated the hoax and can be relied upon to inform the public on the 6 o'clock news? Daniel's associates could divulge the truth on one of the internet's millions of seldom read blogs with limited readership or spill the proverbial beans on a Talkshoe call, but how many of them would go through the trouble of doing this and how many people would listen to the call? Unlike some of the other media hoaxes busted on this site the 9/11 story did not revolve around any particular one of those actors thus their brief performances would have been drowned by the rest of the 9/11 noise. Many of Daniel's associates probably didn't even see his Oscar winning performance.

9/11 was a reality for most people. If you were to tell people that your ex-colleague "Daniel" is not a witness or whatnot but actually just an actor who acted out a script for 9/11 how many people do you think would believe you? Also, even if you tried to rat out your thespian associate what is the likelihood you'd have a video clip of his performance handy substantiate your claim? Even if you convinced two or three people how far do you think the truth would spread? Would people care enough to do anything substantive? What changes would all this effort effect anyway?

Yeah, exactly... that's why no one would really bother in the first place. They figure nothing would come of it anyway.

It's also an argument for the idea that few except the boldest of actors were using their real faces. Faces can be disguised, morphed, warped, and so on. Some of the actors that I know are haughty enough not to inform their colleagues, whom they often view as competitors even when close, about any of their projects that might lend them personal satisfaction outside of sheer fame.

I have been told outright by some friends that actors and actresses get "caught up" in what they are doing so much, in the surface and gleam of it all, that when a CIA-type individual offers them a "role", they might not immediately understand how or why they should say no to something that, on the surface, sounds lucrative and powerful.

Perhaps they even feel a little dirty about it but then they justify it by saying everyone has to make a living. Even if that "living" involves the totally racist and shameful frame up, massacre and looting of entire nations.

My opinion is that the people we see in these psyops are most likely members of or in the families of members of intelligence community people. How many people work for, say, the CIA? They won't say but I imagine it is a very large number and that is only one intel agency and not even the largest. I imagine there are tens of thousands of people in this category at least and probably many, many more.

I suspect they also recruit some outside people for special “jobs.” People who they can either easily control or dispose of due to their situation such as drug addicts or people serving long prison sentences or on their way there.

Are these people actors? Well, they do play a part so they are actors by definition. But, is acting their profession? Maybe for some (or at least their wannabe profession) but I think their intel work comes first. That is, I don't think somebody goes to Central Casting and orders up a few dozen fake witnesses for next week's psyop and then asks them to please not talk about it. Actually, I've worked for Central and a number of similar Hollywood agencies for quite a few years so I'm not pulling this opinion out of thin air. It's just not realistic. But, if a person who is an intel “asset” and also has some acting experience then fine – they can be considered for use. They don't have to be told not to talk – they already know what will happen if they do.

lux wrote:My opinion is that the people we see in these psyops are most likely members of or in the families of members of intelligence community people. How many people work for, say, the CIA? They won't say but I imagine it is a very large number and that is only one intel agency and not even the largest. I imagine there are tens of thousands of people in this category at least and probably many, many more.

I suspect they also recruit some outside people for special “jobs.” People who they can either easily control or dispose of due to their situation such as drug addicts or people serving long prison sentences or on their way there.

Are these people actors? Well, they do play a part so they are actors by definition. But, is acting their profession? Maybe for some (or at least their wannabe profession) but I think their intel work comes first. That is, I don't think somebody goes to Central Casting and orders up a few dozen fake witnesses for next week's psyop and then asks them to please not talk about it. Actually, I've worked for Central and a number of similar Hollywood agencies for quite a few years so I'm not pulling this opinion out of thin air. It's just not realistic. But, if a person who is an intel “asset” and also has some acting experience then fine – they can be considered for use. They don't have to be told not to talk – they already know what will happen if they do.

How many people work for, say, the CIA?

In the 1970's the Coast Guard publicly bragged about how they could get so much done with so little citing: "with 35,000 members we are the same size as the C.I.A."

Funded by largely classified budgets, it's difficult to assess how much the U.S. annually spends on these clandestine operations, but one 2012 estimate pegs the cost at about $75 billion. source

I suspect that budget estimate is very conservative.

And, then we have the intelligence agencies outside the USA.

BTW, there is a guy named Yuri Bezmenov who has a number of interesting interviews and lectures on YouTube. Mostly done in the 1980s I think. He is former KGB and talks about what intelligence agencies actually do. Per Yuri, espionage only makes up about 15% of their activities. The rest is devoted to propaganda, brainwashing and other socially subversive activities.

Meanwhile, Hollywood icons such as James Bond and others paint an entirely different, heroic picture of intelligence work for the gullible masses to admire.

It seems ironic to me that the public hates terrorists and loves spies when they are actually one and the same and neither persona really exists. How confused can one get?